Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
1
Terms of Reference
Consultancy for a Baseline Study and Final Impact Evaluation
of Swiss Church Aid’s Open Forum Programme
in Israel and Palestine
1 Purpose of the Consultancy
Swiss Church Aid (HEKS/EPER) seeks to procure the services of three consultants to design, plan and conduct a baseline study and a final impact evaluation of the Open Forum Programme in Israel and Palestine.
The team of three will be made up of one international lead consultant with extensive knowledge and experience in designing, planning, and conducting impact evaluations; and two national consultants with extensive knowledge and experience in designing, planning, and conducting data collections, as well as in-depth knowledge of the local context.
It is expected that the baseline study will be designed, planned and conducted in such a way as to facilitate the impact measurement at the end of the programme phase. The baseline study is anticipated to take place during April/May/June 2017, while the final impact evaluation is expected to take place during spring/summer 2020.
During the baseline study phase of the consultancy, the consultants will also be required to support the Programme Management Team in refining and implementing the monitoring system in order to facilitate the implementation of the baseline study and the final impact evaluation.
2 About Swiss Church Aid
Swiss Church Aid is the aid organization of the Protestant churches in Switzerland. It is engaged in development cooperation, humanitarian aid, and church cooperation. Swiss Church Aid works in 251 projects worldwide, has its own coordination offices in 17 countries, and employs roughly 450 staff in Switzerland and abroad. In 2015, Swiss Church Aid had an annual budget of nearly 70 million CHF.
3 Description of the Country Programme / Project
The intervention to be evaluated is the Open Forum, a network and exchange platform of organisations working in conflict transformation. The Open Forum serves as an “open” space for partner organisations of the Swiss Church Aid country programme in Israel and Palestine to share experiences, develop synergies, and engage in co-operations. It provides an institutionalised space for developing joint strategies and alternative rights based models for improving access to land, housing and public space, and for planning and implementing common projects around specific problems of access to land, housing and public space.
The evaluation will assess the contribution of the Open Forum intervention to several key changes:
2
− Disenfranchised communities are resilient to resist violations of human rights and effectively keep claiming rights through non-violent means;
− Palestinian and Israeli civil society organisations have jointly developed and are advocating for gender-sensitive human rights based alternatives and strategies for access to land, housing and public space;
− Claims and human rights bases alternatives are more present in public discourse;
− Israeli, Palestinian and international duty bearers take responsibility.
In order to achieve these key changes, the Open Forum partners are working with and are lobbying a variety of stakeholders, including Palestinian, Israeli and international duty bearers and media, civil society organisations, and groups within Israeli and Palestinian society who are denying the rights of others. These changes will benefit various communities and persons with limited access to land, housing and public space, including Palestinian refugees, internally displaced people, unrecognised Bedouin communities, Palestinians and Israelis living in mixed cities, Palestinians living in East Jerusalem and communities in Area C in the West Bank, as well as marginalised people in Gaza.
Please see Annex 1 for the LogFrame of the Open Forum and Annex 2 for the Theory of Change of the Country Programme.
4 Purpose and Scope of the Evaluation
The planned evaluation is an impact evaluation which will consist of a baseline assessment during spring 2017, including the revision and/or set-up of a monitoring system for the Open Forum, and the end-of-phase evaluation in 2020.
The consultant(s) is not expected to commit to both the baseline assessment and the end-of-phase evaluation at once. A first contract will be awarded for setting-up the impact evaluation design and methodology, and for facilitating the baseline assessment. Based on good performance and further availability of the consultant(s), a contract for the final impact evaluation will be awarded.
The Open Forum has begun its current phase in 2016. However, the approval process of individual projects within the Open Forum is still ongoing, so that the baseline assessment process can only begin in spring 2017. The Open Forum partner organisations have recently begun using elements of Outcome Mapping as project planning and monitoring tool.
At the policy level, the purpose of the impact evaluation is to verify the Theory of Change of the Open Forum, in particular the intervention logic and the assumptions relating to creating alternatives for access to land and implementing the right of return. At the management level, the purpose of the impact evaluation is threefold. Conducting an external end-of-phase evaluation is a PCM requirement and serves the purpose of being accountable to the People of our Concern, our partners, and donors. The results of the impact evaluation will also be utilized for the purpose of steering, i.e. for adapting the next programme phase. Lastly, the entire impact evaluation process will also support learning, not just thematically
3
but also methodologically: which impact evaluation designs, approaches, and methods are suitable in a conflict context that is constantly changing and contains a myriad of various actors and influences.
The target audience of the impact evaluation are Swiss Church Aid staff of the Israel and Palestine country programme, as well as the partner organisations participating in the Open Forum, and the Desk Officer for the Israel/Palestine country programme. They will utilize the results to adapt their programming, and to transfer lessons learnt to other interventions. The results are also targeted at the M&E unit of Swiss Church Aid in Switzerland which will utilize the results for reporting purposes, and to improve Swiss Church Aid’s impact assessment policy.
The specific activities or interventions to be covered by this impact evaluation, including their geographic focus, will be determined together with the evaluation team. The time period covered will likely be from April 2017 until the end of 2019.
5 Evaluation Criteria and Questions
The impact evaluation will assess three of the OECD-DAC criteria.
a) Effectiveness
Assessing effectiveness implies measuring the extent to which the Open Forum attained its objectives. Questions to consider are: To what extent were the objectives of the Open Forum achieved? What were the major factors influencing the achievement (or non-achievement) of objectives? The baseline study will need to deliver the baseline values for the respective indicators relating to these objectives.
Specific effectiveness evaluation questions:
- Has the intervention increased the communities’ motivation to claim their rights (individual skills and capacity, internalised individual commitment, group organisation and action)?
- Has the intervention resulted in the development of specific HRBA alternatives for addressing the situation of the concerned communities?
- Have these HRBA alternatives, and the mobilized rights holders behind them, been picked up by local / international media and by relevant civil society actors?
- Have duty bearers been influenced (e.g. to change their rhetoric, behaviour or policies) through awareness of these HRBA alternatives?
- Have the communities managed to maintain / continue to claim their rights of access to land, housing and public spaces based on the HRBA alternatives developed, despite changes in the context?
- To what extent have the communities been successful in claiming their rights?
- Has the public discourse / opinion in Israel and / or internationally been positively changed regarding Palestinian rights on access to land, housing, and public
4
spaces, based on the HRBA alternatives developed and the HR claims made by the concerned communities?
b) Impact
Assessing impact means measuring the changes resulting from the Open Forum. This includes direct and indirect, intended and non-intended, positive and negative changes. Questions to consider are: What has happened as a result of the Open Forum? What real difference have the projects of the Open Forum made for the target groups?
Specific impact evaluation questions:
- How and why did the above mentioned changes happen?
- What role did the Open Forum have in bringing about these changes?
- Which other factors contributed to bringing about these changes?
c) Efficiency
Assessing efficiency means measuring the outputs of the Open Forum in relation to the inputs. The focus of this assessment should be less on cost-efficiency (in comparison to alternative approaches to achieving the same outputs) and more on process-efficiency, i.e. whether newly applied procedural structures (increase of project implementation period, increase of budget, changed application template, etc.) have reduced the administrative costs of the partner organisations and the HEKS Office. The baseline study should provide a summary of the status quo before the procedural structures were amended, and an assessment of how efficient or inefficient these structures were.
6 Evaluation Methodology and Process
Swiss Church Aid understands “impact” as the changes produced by an intervention. Consequently, this impact evaluation should not only measure or describe the changes that have occurred but should also identify the role of the Open Forum in producing these changes (causal attribution, causal contribution, or causal inference). The baseline study ought to be designed in such a way as to allow for the measurement of impact after the end of the Open Forum phase in 2020.
Swiss Church Aid acknowledges that there are various causal approaches and impact evaluation designs, only some of which rely on a counterfactual. For this evaluation, the evaluation team is expected to propose a suitable impact evaluation design. This may either be quasi-experimental, case-based, or theory-based, or a combination thereof (please see Annex 3 for more details). Swiss Church Aid encourages actor agency in its evaluations, so the proposed methodology should include participatory elements; however, a participatory approach only will not be considered sufficient for establishing causality.
The consultant(s) is expected to propose and to justify a preliminary causal approach, design, methodology, and sequence of activities in the application (maximum 1 page). This should be elaborated on in the inception report.
5
7 Deliverables
Application phase:
− As part of the application, the consultant(s) is expected to propose and justify a preliminary causal approach, design, methodology, and sequence of activities (maximum 1 page); comments on the ToR are also invited
Inception phase:
− Inception report, detailing the design and methodology for the baseline study and a preview of the design and methodology for the impact evaluation, including an evaluation matrix, a draft sampling strategy, and a suggested sample size
− Quality assurance plan, setting out the systems and processes for assuring the quality of the research process and the deliverables
Baseline phase:
− Data collection tools (draft, final)
− Training conducted for enumerators on the baseline assessment design, sampling framework, research instruments, and research ethics. Duration and content of the training to be determined by the consultant(s).
− Fully “cleaned-up” dataset in Excel, if applicable
− Transcripts of qualitative data
− Baseline assessment report (draft, final) describing the initial conditions (as of spring 2017) against which progress can be measured or comparisons be made to show the effects of the Open Forum programme in the final impact evaluation report.
− Presentation of baseline study findings to the evaluation steering committee, the programme team, and key stakeholders
− Regular progress reports submitted to Swiss Church Aid’s M&E Officer in Zurich during the consultancy period, detailing 1) activities / tasks completed to date, 2) any challenges faced, 3) any adjustments made in response to the challenges, 4) any deviations from the timeline and explanations for the deviations, and 5) additional human resources and/or logistical support needed.
Impact evaluation phase (second contract):
− Final impact evaluation design, detailing the (updated) design and methodology for the impact evaluation and including an evaluation matrix, a draft sampling strategy, and a suggested sample size
− Data collection tools (draft, final); these tools will include research instruments used during the baseline assessment, any revisions to these tools, and/or the development of new tools
6
− Training conducted for enumerators on the impact evaluation design, sampling framework, research instruments, and research ethics. Duration and content of training to be determined by the consultant(s).
− Fully “cleaned-up” dataset in Excel, if applicable
− Transcripts of qualitative data
− Impact evaluation report (draft, final)
− Presentation of impact evaluation findings to the evaluation steering committee, the programme team, and key stakeholders
− Regular progress reports submitted to Swiss Church Aid’s M&E Officer in Zurich during the consultancy period, detailing 1) activities / tasks completed to date, 2) any challenges faced, 3) any adjustments made in response to the challenges, 4) any deviations from the timeline and explanations for the deviations, and 5) additional human resources and/or logistical support needed.
8 Schedule and Budget
March 2017 Application phase / hiring of consultant(s)
April 2017 − Document review
− Inception Report
− M&E self-assessment of partners (if required)
− The international consultant is expected to spend 5 days on these preparatory tasks; working days / deadlines will be determined in consultation with the consultant. This work is expected to be home-based.
− The two national consultants are expected to spend a total of 4 days on these preparatory tasks; working days / deadlines will be determined in consultation with the international consultant.
− The Swiss Church Aid team in Israel/Palestine, as well as the Desk Officer and the M&E Officer in Zurich will support these tasks.
May 2017 − Inception meeting
− Plan first field phase (baseline data collection, revision or set-up of M&E system)
− Develop data collection tools
− The international consultant is expected to spend 15 days (including travel) on preparing and facilitating/conducting the baseline data collection. This work is expected to take
7
− Possibly development of capacity building curriculum for partners
− Sampling
− Choosing comparison group (if applicable)
− Train enumerators, translate the data collection tools, field-test the data collection tools (as part of the enumerator training)
− Facilitate/conduct baseline data collection
place in Israel and Palestine.
− The national consultants are expected to spend 15 days each on preparing and conducting the baseline data collection.
− The Swiss Church Aid team in Israel/Palestine, the partner organisations, as well as the Desk Officer and the M&E Officer in Zurich will support these tasks.
− Data may either be collected by the consultants, by field staff from the partner organisations, and/or by hired enumerators.
June 2017 − Data entry
− Data analysis
− Writing the baseline report (content and length will be agreed upon during the inception phase based upon the evaluation questions, the sampled projects, and the chosen indicators)
− Data entry and data analysis will be done by a data entry firm.
− The international consultant is expected to spend 5 days on writing the baseline report. This work is expected to be done home-based.
− The national consultants are expected to spend a total of 4 days on writing the baseline report.
− The Swiss Church Aid team in Israel/Palestine, the partner organisations, as well as the Desk Officer and the M&E Officer in Zurich will review the baseline report and comment on it.
June 2017 to end of 2019 − Regular monitoring
− Regular reflection
− Partner staff and Swiss Church Aid Country Office staff
− Supported by the Desk Officer and the M&E Officer
January 2020 to June 2020
(second contract)
− Preparation of second field phase
− Update of data collection tools (if required)
− Update of sampling strategy
− The international consultant is expected to spend 25 days (including travel) on these tasks.
− The national consultants are expected to spend 23 days
8
(if required)
− Update of comparison group (if required)
− Endline data collection
− Data entry
− Data analysis
− Report writing
− Presenting the evaluation results
each on these tasks.
− These tasks will be supported by the partners, the Swiss Church Aid Country Office, the Desk Officer, and the M&E Officer.
The consultants are expected to submit their daily rate, including VAT, and their estimated travel costs to and from Jerusalem as part of the application. Accommodation and transportation in country will be arranged directly by the Swiss Church Aid Country Office and/or the partner organisations and does not need to be included in the budget. Enumerators will be hired locally – if required – and do not need to be included in the budget.
9 Management Roles and Responsibilities
The consultant(s) will be responsible for administering and supervising the baseline study, including the methodological preparation, the data collection and analysis, and writing the baseline study report. If the contract is extended to include the impact evaluation, the consultant(s) will be responsible for the same tasks during the impact evaluation.
The Steering Committee consists of the Country Director of the Swiss Church Aid Country Programme in Israel and Palestine, the Desk Officer of the Country Programme based at Swiss Church Aid HQ in Zurich, and the M&E Officer of Swiss Church Aid, also based in Zurich.
The Steering Committee will oversee the administration and overall coordination of the entire assessment / evaluation process, including monitoring progress. The main functions of the Steering Committee are:
− Establishing the Terms of Reference;
− Reviewing, commenting on and endorsing the Inception Report;
− Engaging periodically with the substance of the evaluation and providing preliminary feedback to the consultant(s);
− Managing the commenting process on the draft baseline assessment / impact evaluation report;
− Reviewing, commenting on and endorsing the final report; and
− Establishing a dissemination and utilization strategy.
9
The M&E Officer (HQ) will lead the Steering Committee. During its work, the Steering Committee will strive towards reaching consensus on any issues that are discussed. In case of disagreement among the Committee members, the M&E Officer (HQ) will decide. In case of disagreement regarding comments on the draft baseline assessment and/or impact evaluation report, minority views will be reflected in an annex to the final report.
The Swiss Church Aid Country Office in Israel / Palestine will assist the consultant(s) by providing all necessary documents (proposals, logframes or alternative results models, workplans, budgets, reports) and by facilitating access to key stakeholders and specific information or expertise needed to complete the evaluation. Together with the partner organisations, the Swiss Church Aid Country Office will coordinate the field research, including meetings, transportation and logistics, as well as organising the debriefing / presentation workshops.
The Consultant(s) will report directly to the M&E Officer (HQ) who will manage the consultancy contract(s). A draft chart indicating roles and responsibilities of all stakeholders is attached in Annex 4.
10 Follow up of the Evaluation
a) Assessment of the reports: The baseline assessment report and the impact evaluation report will be assessed by the M&E Officer (HQ) against Swiss Church Aid’s Quality of Evidence checklist.
b) Management response: The Country Director of the Israel / Palestine Country Programme will write a management response, providing the Country Director’s perspective on the results and recommendations. The Country Director will also develop an Action Plan to ensure that findings and actionable recommendations are disseminated, and appropriate action is taken.
c) Swiss Church Aid will publish a summary of the baseline assessment report and the impact evaluation report on its website. Further external dissemination will be discussed by the Steering Committee.
11 List of Documents
Documents for the desk review will include:
− Evaluation report of the 2012 – 2015 programme cycle
− Final project reports, 2015 (30 projects)
− Proposal of the 2016 – 2020 programme cycle
− Project proposals, 2016 (15)
− Annual programme reports, 2015 and 2016
− Annual project reports, 2016 (11)
10
12 Evaluation Team / Qualifications
The evaluation team will be made up of one international consultant and two national consultants (one Palestinian, one Israeli). The Israeli consultant has already been selected. Applications are invited either from individual consultants (international or Palestinian) who fulfil the requirements below or from teams of consultants (one international, one Palestinian) who fulfil the requirements.
The international consultant is expected to meet the following qualifications:
− Master’s degree in the social sciences (sociology, anthropology, development studies)
− At least 5 years of research and other relevant professional experience
− Sound understanding of various approaches to assess impact
− Sound expertise in quantitative and qualitative data collection and analysis
− Strong analytical skills and proficiency in writing in English
− Ability to deliver quality reports/analysis and results in line with established deadlines
− In-depth knowledge of the situation in Israel and Palestine, in particular with regards to the discourse regarding the right of return
− Knowledge and demonstrated experience with a human rights based approach to programming
− Excellent facilitation and coordination skills
− Fluency in English, Arabic is an asset
− Access throughout Israel, the West Bank and Gaza (Swiss Church Aid will apply for a permit to Gaza for the consultant if Gaza projects are sampled)
The national consultant is expected to meet the following qualifications:
− Master’s degree in the social sciences (sociology, anthropology, development studies)
− At least 2 years of research and other relevant professional experience
− Some understanding of various approaches to assess impact
− Sound expertise in quantitative and qualitative data collection and analysis
− Strong analytical skills and proficiency in writing in English
− Ability to deliver quality reports/analysis and results in line with established deadlines
− In-depth knowledge of the situation in Israel and Palestine, in particular with regards to the discourse regarding the right of return
11
− Knowledge and demonstrated experience with a human rights based approach to programming
− Excellent facilitation and coordination skills
− Fluency in Arabic, as well as good English language skills to converse with the international consultant and draft parts of the baseline and/or impact evaluation report
− Access to the West Bank and Gaza; access to Jerusalem would be considered an asset; however, it is not a prerequisite for an application (Swiss Church Aid will apply for a permit to Jerusalem for the consultant, if required, and to Gaza if Gaza projects are sampled)
Interested and eligible candidates should submit the following:
− A cover letter, indicating how the candidate meets the required qualifications (maximum 2 pages)
− A CV (maximum 3 pages)
− Proposed causal approach, design, methodology, and sequence of activities (maximum 1 page)
− Two references
If selected for an interview, the candidate will be requested to submit one example of previous, similar work.
The following criteria will be used when evaluating the proposals:
− The experience and competence of the consultant(s) in relation to the Terms of Reference;
− The proposed methodology for the assignment in relation to the Terms of Reference;
− The consultant(s) ability to perform the assignment in the appropriate time; and
− The budget for the assignment.
Submit completed applications (preferably in one file) with the e-mail title “Application Impact Assessment Israel / Palestine” to [email protected] by March 15th, 2017. Please indicate in your application on which website you came across the call for applications. For questions about your application, please contact Ms. Annika Klotz, M&E Officer at Swiss Church Aid in Zurich ([email protected]).
Interviews are likely to take place during the fourth week of March. For international candidates, interviews will either take place in Zurich or via skype; for national candidates, interviews will either take place in Jerusalem or via skype.
12
ANNEX 1 – LogFrame of the Open Forum
Project theory of change / intervention logic Objectively verifiable indicators (incl. HEKS Key Indicators)
Sources / means of verification Key Risks (contextual, programmatic, institutional)
Expected impact: Disenfranchised and/or dispossessed communities enjoy their rights and can maintain or improve their access to land, housing and public space
Key Sought Change 1: Disenfranchised communities are resilient to resist violations of human rights and effectively keep claiming rights through nonviolent means.
• Intermediary outcome 1.1: Disenfranchised communities, men and women, are more aware about their rights and about root causes of conflict
• Intermediary outcome 1.2: Disenfranchised communities have motivation, leadership, women participation and organizational capacities to claim rights and to adapt their methods to the fast changing conflictive context.
• Intermediary outcome 1.3: Disenfranchised communities have better protection strategies which include specific needs of men and women
• intermediary outcome 1.4: Disenfranchised communities are able to maintain livelihoods
• Intermediary outcome 1.5: Different disenfranchised groups have overcome fragmentation and have more unified claims
• HKI: observed changes in the adaptive capacity of rural communities
• Progress marker about integration, leadership and organizational capacities of disenfranchised communities to be elaborated together with partner organisations
• # of protection strategies elaborated, quality and effectiveness of protection strategies
• HKI: # of activities striving for equality and non-violence taken up by participants of HEKS/EPER’s rights and CT education/CB based on their own initiatives
• HKI: % of women that report effective participation in decision-making bodies at community level
• Reports of bilateral projects and JA, evaluation meetings
• To be defined
• Protection strategies, assessment by community
• According to guidelines for HKI • According to guidelines for HKI
• Increase of power struggles and conflicts on community level
• Increase of open civilian violence and state violence
• Increase of extremist ideologies (nationalism, fundamentalism, fascism)
• Shift from two state paradigm to a one state (by facts on the ground created by Israel, by change of the role of the PA) – accompanied by mass annexation of lands by Israel and fundamental change of the role of PA
• Inability to operate in present working areas because of shrinking space
Key Sought Change 2: Palestinian and Israeli civil society organizations have jointly developed and are advocating for gender-sensitive human rights based alternatives & strategies for access to land, housing and public space
# of models/concepts for human rights based alternatives elaborated and advocated for by PO
• Reports of bilateral projects and JA
13
Key Sought Change 3: Claims and human rights based alternatives are more present in public discourse
• Intermediary outcome 3.1: Human Rights Based alternatives and claims are taken up by more civil society actors (pal./isr./intl.)
• Intermediary outcome 3.2: HRB alternatives and claims are taken up by media (pal./isr./intl.)
• Intermediary outcome 3.3: Resistant or indifferent persons and groups are more favourable to equal rights and Human Rights based alternatives
• Intermediary outcome 3.4: Partner Organisations and Right Holders actively claim protection of space for civil society
• # of Civil Society Actors other than HEKS PO who have taken up human rights based alternatives proposed by POs
• HKI: Quality of representation of discrimination of minorities in public discourse and the media
• Reports of bilateral projects and JA
• To be developed, according to to guidelines for HKI
Key Sought Change 4: Israeli, Palestinian and international Duty bearers take responsibility • Intermediary outcome 4.1: Claims are addressed to
duty bearers (pal./isr./intl.) • Duty bearers respect and protect the space for civil
society social and political action
• HKI: # of official claims reflecting the interests of PooC made/accepted with the contribution of HEKS/EPER or POs
• HKI: HEKS/EPER activities have made progress towards the creation or reform of institutions and policies which handle grievances and the enactment of equal rights
• To be developed, according to to guidelines for HKI
Examples of Activities 2016 Indicators on output level
14
Contributing to key sought change 1: • Capacity Building for communities in HRBA,
alternative planning, advocacy or monitoring of public policies (according to needs) (Adrid, HRA, ACAP, Badil, Emek Shaveh…)
• Communities in Gush Ezion Region start to work together, create a representative structure and start developing joint strategies for maintaining access to land in area C (Badil)
• Promoting exchange of experience between organizations and communities, with special emphasiz of linking initiatives in Gaza to the Open Forum (Open Forum in general)
• Development of protection strategies • Raising awareness on cultural and land rights of
communities affected by limited access to land because of archeological projects (Emek Shaveh, Yesh Din, PalVision)
• Councelling to IDPs in Israel and planners about the consequences of a new law affecting “absentee property” (ACAP, Adrid)
• Al least 100 persons from minorities
and marginalized communities have improved skills which help them to claim their rights
• Jointly developed strategy by communities
• Observed cases of new or improved cooperation
• At least 2 protection strategies developed
• At least 6 communities invoved in actions about archeological projects
• Number of IDPs and planners who have
contacted the helpdesk
• Participant lists, participant’s
evaluation of CB events
• Project reports, outcome of
reflection meetings
• Outcomes of joint reflection
meetings
• Project reports, outcome of reflection meetings
• Project reports, outcome of
reflection meetings
• Project report
Contributing to key sought change 2: • Submit an alternative planning in a case of
Palestinian village inside Israel (ACAP) • Participants of the Oudna project engage with their
communities to further develop visions for return to their villages (Adrid, Baladna, HRA, Zochrot)
• Publications, public discussions and conferences practicalities of return are presented and discussed (Zochrot, Badil)
• Case submitted • At least 6 villages have further
developed visions of return with participation of others than youth
• At least 1000 persons (including 10 previously identified key persons) reached by information and debates about practicalities of return
• Project reports
• Project reports, evaluation
meetings
• Project reports, attendance lists
15
Contributing to key sought change 3: • Media campaigns on issues of equal rights (Israel
Social TV, HRA, Baladna, Adrid, …) • Build up additional partnership that reaches out to
wider Israeli society • Develop strategy for Advocacy Work on report by
Kerem Navot about state land declaration policy in the WB
• POs actively participate in public campaigns and coalitions against new law proposals in Israel (Adrid, HRA, New Profile, Zochrot)
• Establish advocacy subforum, manage information flow between POs and HEKS/EPER
• At least 20 articles or TV/Radio
emissions on issues of access to land, housing and public space published through initatives of POs
• Partnership successfully built up • Advocacy strategy elaborated and
being implemented • At least 4 POs of the OF are involved
• Advocacy subforum is functioning
• Project reports, tracking of
media work
• Program portfolio • Project reports, outcome of
workshop
• Project reports and outcome of reflection meetings
• Annual Program report
Contributing to key sought change 4: • Interventions with Israeli authorities on access of
Palestinian communities to archeological sites (Emek Shaveh, Yesh Din)
• Proposition of alternative plan to planning committee in the case of one Palestinian village inside Israel (ACAP)
• Number and outcome of meetings with
authorities
• Plan has been received by planning committee
• Documentation of meetings, project report
• Project report
16
ANNEX 2 – Theory of Change
17
The OF will continue to focus on access to land, housing and public space, because – as shown in the context analysis - this is a key area where rights of people of concern are violated in a systematic way and because this is an important basis for any sustainable development of livelihoods in the longer term.
The overall objective of the OF thus can be formulated as follows:
Disenfranchised and/or dispossessed communities enjoy their rights and can maintain or improve their access to land, housing and public space.
As described in the context analysis, access to land, housing and public spaces has been further deteriorating in the past years, resulting in a situation where the program will need to focus on maintaining current access and slowing down dispossession and displacement, while improvements might be out of reach for some communities in the current political situation.
In order to make progress towards this long term objective, the program will focus on three levels of intervention: 1. disenfranchised communities of right holders themselves and civil society organizations which represent them and work with them, 2. Increase public involvement of wider Israeli, Palestinian and International civil society for the respect of rights 3. Addressing Israeli, Palestinian and International duty bearers.
1. On the level of disenfranchised communities of right holders As described in the context analysis, systematic violations of rights deeply affect daily lives of many Palestinian communities and severely obstruct their economic development. Increasing the resilience of disenfranchised communities thus is key for them to continue living in their places and for their abilities to claim their rights, as is stated in the following key sought change:
Expected Outcome / Key sought change 1 Disenfranchised communities are resilient to resist violations of human rights and effectively keep claiming rights through nonviolent means.
Increasing their resilience in a comprehensive way starts with an increasing awareness about their rights and about root causes of conflict. Experience of the last program phase also showed that it is crucial to address both men and women in efforts to facilitate a common understanding of the rights the community would be entitled to and the root causes for the denial of these rights.
Often, disenfranchised communities are paralyzed and show signs of disintegration. In a situation of long-standing conflict, maintaining motivation despite external pressure and backlashes is a challenge. As a result, HEKS/EPER and PO will support communities in building their organizational and leadership capacities, in addressing disintegrative tendencies and in finding ways to keep up motivation of their members. A further step consists in enlarging the support basis within the community, bring local key persons and opinion leaders on board.
During the past years, pressure on communities claiming rights and on individual human rights defenders have increased. It is therefore crucial that communities, POs and HEKS jointly reflect on protection strategies and elaborate concrete protection plans for different scenarios. These can include measures such as local or international protective presence, targeted advocacy work to increase protection or legal assistance.
Especially in rural areas in the West Bank (and possibly also Gaza), people of concern increasingly pointed to the importance of access to markets as a way to maintain a livelihood and to stay in their town or villages despite difficult conditions and discriminatory regulations. While HEKS/EPER decided
18
not to build up a fully developed additional focus of its program at the time being, it will include this aspect of maintaining resilience in in its projects by fostering cooperation with specialist organizations and by possibly supporting pilot activities in this field.
Interventions on this level will target mainly Palestinian communities in all geographical areas of the program, as they are the ones who are mostly deprived of their access to land, housing and public space. In some cases inside Israel, however (e.g. in mixed cities), other groups of Israeli society might suffer from the same issues and are deprived of rights as well. HEKS/EPER will foster approaches which try to connect different deprived groups with each other and provide space for finding common denominators where possible.
Key strategies of intervention on the levels of communities of right holders:
− Capacity building and awareness raising about rights in disenfranchised communities − Support of strategic processes and organizational development of CBOs with representative role − Legal assistance − Protective presence and protective advocacy − Capacity building and empowerment to ensure women participation on all levels − Linking communities up with existing projects to increase livelihoods and access to markets − Pilot projects of production and marketing initiatives
2. Level of wider Israeli, Palestinian and international civil society and media
One of the main obstacles that needs to be overcome in order to make equal rights more accepted, are powerful discourses which claim that there are no alternatives to discrimination and use of force towards Palestinians, because otherwise the rights of Israelis would be in danger (“us or them logic”), or simply that rights based solutions are impossible. Especially for the broader Israeli public, the idea of respecting the rights of all is also connected to fears and taboos. Human Rights Based Alternatives can play an important role in showing that it is possible to find solutions which protect both the rights of Palestinians and Israelis and thus also addressing some of the fears and taboos. By cooperating and working jointly, partner organizations are able to develop rights based alternatives for access to land, housing and public space, which can be advocated for among Israeli, Palestinians and international publics. In the previous program phases this has been done for the issues of return of refugees and IDPs and by using alternative planning as a method to present alternatives to discriminatory planning.
Alternative strategies are also needed as means of non-violent resistance to Human Rights violations such as forced displacement and dispossession. Especially in cases where there are little possibilities to reach an improvement of the situation through the legal system. In the last program phase, such strategies have been developed for example in the Gush Ezion area in the West Bank and in the Negev/Naqab.
Both aspects are reflected in the second key sought change of the theory of change:
Expected Outcome / key sought change 2 Palestinian and Israeli civil society organizations have jointly developed and are advocating for gender-sensitive human rights based alternatives & strategies for access to land, housing and public space.
A next step of the theory of change then consists in bringing both the elaborated human rights based alternatives together with the claims of disenfranchised groups into wider society and public discourse:
19
Expected outcome / key sought change 3 Claims and human rights based alternatives are more present in public discourse
This can be done through a variety of ways, depending on the issue, the target groups to be addressed and the state of discussion: − For many issues, bringing more civil society actors on board is a first step to reach out to wider
society. This is done through active networking, study days, tours on the ground, conferences etc. − Systematic media work, involving traditional and new media, contributes to spreading the ideas
to a wider public and putting issues on the agenda. Media also play an important role in increasing public awareness about root causes of conflict.
− As mentioned above, dealing with resistance, fears and indifference towards violations of rights of Palestinians of wide sectors of Israeli society is a challenge for the program. In the past, partners of the Open Forum have for example organized tours to expose Israeli groups to issues of access to land in area C of the West Bank or to visit destroyed Palestinian villages inside Israel in order to inform Israeli groups about the Naqba and to bring up the problems of IDPs in Israel. While evaluations have shown that these definitely had some effects on the - and sometimes beyond - the participating groups, creativity will be needed to develop additional means to find “cracks” in indifference and reduce resistance. This can also involve engaging people in / providing space for deep processes where preconceived opinions are reflected upon and trustful visions can be built up.
− In Palestinian society, the issues at stake are creating a broader basis for human rights based approaches and alternatives and overcoming fragmentation – not only geographically, but also for example between refugees and non-refugees, so that more unified visions can emerge.
− International civil society also plays an important role in preparing the ground for human rights based approaches. Its role is to point to complicity of their own countries with HR violations in Palestine/Israel and to advocate their countries to fulfill their obligations as third states to the conflict in view of systematic violations of international law. HEKS/EPER’s partner organizations agree that there won’t be any fundamental change to the present situation without international pressure. In addition, international civil society can also give human rights based alternatives and models a platform which then can create resonance back in Israel and occupied Palestine (e.g. by media attendance, …).
As detailed in the context analysis, space for civil society becomes more and more limited in both Israel and occupied Palestine. Advocating actively for an enabling environment will thus be a very important transversal issue for the next program phase. The assessment that is currently done by ACT partners will provide the background for developing strategic interventions by Israeli, Palestinian and international organizations. Key Strategies of intervention on the level of wider civil society: − Active networking with wider civil society (local/international), using present and new networks − Media work − Public campaigns, conferences, study days, tours and delegations − Documentation/Publication of HR violations and possible solutions / human rights based
alternatives − Sensitize indifferent or resistant groups about HR violations and for possible solutions, provide
space for addressing fears and resistance − Advocacy for protection of space for civil society
20
3. Level of Israeli, Palestinian and international duty bearers
HEKS/EPER’s theory of change assumes that there are two main ways of engaging duty bearers. In some cases, it will be possible to address duty bearers directly, e.g. by sensitizing a specific Palestinian or Israeli ministry for the needs of disenfranchised communities, or by addressing the EU or Switzerland on the basis of their 3rd states responsibilities. In other cases, public awareness and in some cases also pressure first needs to built up, as described under 2. The desired long term outcome of both strategies is the following:
Expected outcome / key sought change 4 Israeli, Palestinian and international Duty bearers take responsibility
This involves both the responsibilities of Israeli, Palestinian and International duty bearers towards the rights of disenfranchised groups and communities and their responsibility for the protection of an enabling environment and space for civil society.
Key Strategies of intervention: − Lobbying Palestinian, Israeli and international duty bearers − UN advocacy − Advocacy towards EU and Switzerland on the basis of 3rd states responsibilities − Inform, raise awareness and maintain contacts to duty bearers where possible − Delegations, field visits
21
ANNEX 3 – Causal approaches and impact evaluation designs
22
ANNEX 4 – REWA Chart indicating roles and responsibilities
R = Responsible (overall responsibility for the respective task or process)
E = Expert (to be consulted during the respective task or process, to provide input and/or feedback for the task or process)
W = Work (responsible for actually carrying out the work)
A = Approver (responsible for approving the task or process, responsible for approving the respective end result)
Part. = Participating (in meetings)
I = Informed
O = Omitted
TASKS
(IN CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER)
HO Partner Desk Officer M&E Officer Head of M&E
Lead
Cons.
Nat.
Cons.
Survey Team
Due
Date
Preparatory tasks
Inform the partners about the impact assessment process and their (expected) involvement
R/W/A I I I O O O O
Hire international consultant E I E R/W A O O O
Hire national consultant(s) R/W I A E I O O O
Review documents A O O O O R/W R/W O
Conduct inception meeting A/Part. Part. I I O R/W W O
23
TASKS
(IN CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER)
HO Partner Desk Officer M&E Officer Head of M&E
Lead
Cons.
Nat.
Cons.
Survey Team
Due
Date
Methodological preparation
Write the inception report, provide feedback, revise
E E E E/A E R/W W O
Facilitate the partners’ M&E self-assessment
A/W R/W I E O E E O
Develop capacity building plan for the HO and the partner organisations
E E I E O R/W W O
Develop data collection tools E E I E/A O R/W W O
Translation of data collection tools To be done by the national consultants or by a professional, experienced translator in consultation with the consultants
Finalise sampling E E I E/A O R/W W O
Select / match comparison group E E I E/A O R/W W O
Plan the first field phase (logistics, hire enumerators, prepare enumerator training)
A/W W I I O R/W W I
Baseline data collection and analysis
Train enumerators, field-test data collection tools (as part of the enumerator training)
Part. Part. I A I R/W W Part.
Collect baseline data Part. Part. I A O R/W W W
Data entry and initial analysis of quantitative data
To be done by data entry firm; to be approved by lead consultant and M&E Officer
24
TASKS
(IN CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER)
HO Partner Desk Officer M&E Officer Head of M&E
Lead
Cons.
Nat.
Cons.
Survey Team
Due
Date
Further analysis of quantitative data and full analysis of qualitative data
E/A E E/A E/A O R/W W O
Write the baseline report, provide feedback, revise
E E E E/A I R/W W O
Possibly adaptation of M&E system R/W W A E O E E O
Implementation and monitoring phase
Regular monitoring and reflection R/W W A I O O O O
Endline data collection and analysis
Hire international consultant E I E R/W A O O O
Hire national consultant(s) R/W I A I I O O O
Review documents A O O O O R/W R/W O
Conduct inception meeting A/Part. Part. I I O R/W W O
Update the data collection tools, sampling strategy, and comparison group, if required
E E E E/A I R/W W O
Translate changes to data collection tools, if required
To be done by professional, experienced translator in consultation with the consultants
Plan the second field phase (logistics, hire enumerators, prepare enumerator training)
A/W W I I O R/W W I
25
TASKS
(IN CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER)
HO Partner Desk Officer M&E Officer Head of M&E
Lead
Cons.
Nat.
Cons.
Survey Team
Due
Date
Train enumerators, field-test data collection tools (as part of the enumerator training)
Part. Part. I A I R/W W Part.
Collect endline data Part. Part. I A O R/W W W
Data entry and initial analysis of quantitative data
To be done by data entry firm; to be approved by lead consultant and M&E Officer
Further analysis of quantitative data and full analysis of qualitative data
E/A E E/A E/A O R/W W O
Writing the final report, provide feedback, revise
E E E E/A I R/W W O
Present impact assessment results Part. Part. Part. Part. I R/W W O
Possibly adaptation of projects / programme
R/W W A E O E E O
Share and capitalise impact assessment results
As appropriate
